it can make art interesting, yes. if an artist makes a piece as an obvious metaphor then it is the obvious intent of the artist for their metaphor to be understood. that being said, art does not exist purely as a vessel for metaphor. there are many pieces I can point you to that aren't "a pretty sunrise with birds chirping" that definitely convey a message without something being a concrete representation of something else. often art is an interaction between the art and viewer in that the emotion it creates in the viewer is part of the experience. this kind of thing can't always be put into words. so I personally think it's almost insulting to artists who aren't creating a political cartoon or a concept album (or other forms of obvious metaphor) to try and overanalyze something to the point of thinking everything represents something concrete. often it doesn't.

also why did you respond to me three times?

all art doesn't have to be a metaphor einstein. idk where this braindead idea came from that leaves so many people thinking this thing represents that thing or armchair critics overanalyzing art films in youtube comments. sometimes art is purely there for the emotions it elicits and sometimes the best art does that and only that.

plenty of guys like that in arizona, not just a washington thing